AG0109S170001QuestionsandAnswers.pdf

Questions and Answers - AG-0109-S-17-0001

Draft RFP Section #

Draft

RFP

Page# Question # Question/Response

Section E-1 (b) 145 Q-1

“Part A: Non-Price Section” is referenced in the “Proposal Organization” instructions;

however, no other “parts” are referenced in this section (i.e. Price Section, Contracts Section, etc.).

Should offerors create other parts in addition to the organization listed in Section E-1 (b)? Does the pricing information have to be separate from the rest of the proposal?

USFS Response: The Draft RFP did not include information related to submission of the price proposal section. This will be detailed in the final RFP when it is released.

There is no “Contracts” section in Section E.

Contract clauses are provided in Section D and will be incorporated into the signed contract.

Section E-1 (a) (5)

Section E-1 (b)

144 & 145 Q-2

Both referenced sections reference a “Section E-2”, which is presumably a section that details the evaluation criteria, but no such section exists in the RFP. Will this section be provided?

USFS Response: The Draft RFP did not include Section E-2 titled “FAR 52.212-2 Evaluation – Commercial Items.” This will be included in the final RFP when it is released.

EXHIBIT 13 -

INTERAGENCY

HELICOPTER

LOAD

CALCULATION

(B-3, C-2 (a) (3), C-10 (a) (6), C-10 (b) (2))

93 Q-3

Does the operator need to use the weight reduction figure that the USFS requires in the Load Calculation though there is no External Load requirement on this requirement?

USFS Response: Yes, the fixed weight reduction is utilized for non-external loads only. Operators do not use this reduction when doing external load operations with only the pilot on board.

C-39 52 Q-4

The RFP states that Gov’t will pay for fuel transportation and if Gov’t provides the fuel the fuel cost will be charges based upon rates of the nearest accessible point. If this was to occur on this contract and the fuel is reimbursed for the fuel purchased, yet not all the fuel is utilized in the performance of the contract, does the Contractor still get 100% of the fuel costs reimbursed?

USFS Response: C-39 applies to transportation costs. Fuel costs are included in the helicopter hourly rate. The government will not reimburse the contractor for unused fuel.

Item No. 1 3 Q-5

The number of days for Option Year 1 (71) and Option Year 3 (59) don’t match the dates on Page 2 table of 69 days for all option years.

USFS Response: Acknowledged. These dates and figures will be corrected in the final RFP.

Item No. 2 4 Q-6

The Vessel availability days 6/14/2017 to 8/12/2017 are mismatched from the aircraft availability of 6/2/2017-8/13/2017. Was this intentional? Will the helicopter crews need lodging and land-based support prior to ship start dates?

USFS Response: Acknowledged. The MAP for the vessel will likely begin a day or two before the helicopter MAP. This gives USFS employees time to embark on the vessel before the helicopter is needed.

Item No. 1 2 Q-7

When the helicopter is not based on the ship is the travel cost reimbursable per Section C-41 (Page 52)?

USFS Response: Section C-41 has been deleted (Reserved). Anytime the helicopter is used away from the vessel, C-32 will apply.

Item No. 1 3 Q-8

The aircraft and vessel are typically based in different locations throughout the year as contractors perform similar activities with a variety of customers. Will the USFS add a

CLIN (contract line item number) for the mobilization and demobilization of the helicopter to Ketchikan and from Homer?

USFS Response: The government will not pay separately for mobilization and demobilization. Offerors may choose to include these costs in the helicopter and vessel daily rates.

C-1 I. (i) 11 Q-9

Will the USFS provide the average number of traveled miles per year expected for the vessel?

A maximum number of miles traveled would allow for accurate fuel pricing calculations.

USFS Response: RFP section C1.1(i) states “Movement of the vessel may occur on any or all days and could range from 10 miles to over 100 miles (it is expected the vessel will move about 20 to 50 miles most days). The historic average total distance travelled by the vessel in a single use period is approximately 3,100 miles. Most vessel moves generally occur in the evenings after government agency personnel have returned to the vessel after field work, but numerous overnight moves and several moves of a full 24 hours (or more) are required each use period.”

General N/A Q-10

Does the USFS need to perform deck landing check rides each season with the vessel and helicopter prior to the season beginning?

USFS Response: This is a 3-year endorsement for vessel landings. If pilots are the same, the evaluation will only be needed every 3 years. If new pilots are brought in, then full evaluation would be needed.

C-63 (b) –

VESSEL

INSPECTION

AND

ACCEPTANCE

70 Q-11

Some of the requirements pertain to Mobile Offshore Drilling Units, which we assume the Government does not want to be bid on this contract. Using the USCG Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular 9-81 (NVC 9-81) is redundant especially if the Government intends to require the 5 star certification. If a vessel’s existing inspections exceed the requirements for a USCG 5-star safety rating would the Government consider removing the 5-star certification requirement?

USFS Response: You are correct. The Government is not interested in Mobile Offshore Drilling Units. The 5-Star safety inspection requirement only applies to uninspected passenger vessels (including Oceanographic Research Vessels that are uninspected). Any measures taken by a vessel operator to improve safety on the vessel (including exceeding established requirements) should be included in the proposal for evaluation purposes.

C-63 (b) –

VESSEL

INSPECTION

70 Q-12

Regarding the Helicopter deck, fueling system and fire protection as listed in 46 CFR 108.

231-241. The only area that may be a problem is trying to conform to the deck loading in 46 CFR 108.235 (1) & (2). These are calculations that are based on a mobile offshore drilling unit utilizing a much large helicopter. Would the Government consider revising the deck loading requirement?

USFS Response: The Government is revising the deck loading requirements in the final RFP.

C-63 (d) (e) –

VESSEL

INSPECTION

70 Q-13

This is not a requirement for this class and size of vessel and most vessels will not be able to obtain this documentation. We interpret this section to read as follows:

“The vessel should follow all the regulations pertaining to the class and tonnage of the vessel as presented in 46 CFR Regards to the helicopter landing deck, fueling system and fire support it should follow the items listed in 46 CFR 108.321 - .241 except that a Marine Engineer should provide a letter approving the landing deck for the size of the helicopter to be provided.”

Would the Government consider revising this requirement?

USFS Response: Yes, the Government will consider revising this requirement.

However, the Government is requiring the endorsement of a Naval Architect.

C-63 (b) –

VESSEL

INSPECTION

70 Q-14

The following main topics are imperative to vessel and crew safety:

1. Fire response teams and proper equipment.

2. Vessel structure and stability.

3. Helicopter deck layout, FAA/USCG paint requirements, helicopter deck tie down positions.

4. Specifications of the fueling stations and systems.

Will the Government address these safety issues in the final RFP?

USFS Response: All requirements are specified in the RFP. If an offeror feels their vessel or helicopter exceeds requirements in a way that benefits the Government (e.g.

improves safety or stability), that information should be highlighted in the offeror’s proposal.

Section E-1 (b) 145 Q-15

A3 – Past Performance. How many past performance references may the contractor provide?

USFS Response: The final RFP will set a limit on past performance references – likely 3-5 relevant references for work within the past 5 years.

General N/A Q-16

Are there any page limit requirements? Is a certain font, or page format/margin required?

USFS Response: The final RFP will govern, but there is currently no intention of giving page limits.

VESSEL

REQUIREMENTS Q-17

The requirements state (1) The vessel shall be equipped with a stable platform capable of landing and transporting a helicopter, installed, certificated, maintained, and operated in accordance with USCG NVC 9- 81, 46 CFR 1.108.231-235 and American Bureau of Shipping Guide for the Class Notation:

Helicopter Deck and Facilities as applicable to helicopter facilities on vessels, and applicable FAA REQUIREMENTS for shipboard helicopter landing facilities and for helicopter operations conducted while at anchor or under way."

It also states: "(4) The helicopter landing platform shall meet minimum dimensional requirements of 20 x 20 feet."

The two requirements seem to contradict each other. Can this be better explained please?

An ABS helipad would be closer to 40 x 40 foot. If the vessel is ABS classed then they would by law need to meet ABS standards but for vessels not ABS classed the USCG and FAA rules apply.

USCG certificated vessels have to meet special requirements as well for helipads which is under NVC 9- 81.

Uninspected Passenger Vessels (UPV), which carry 12 or less passengers and are over 100 gross tons, are not required by law to meet those standards the RFP is asking for. The USCG requires the helipad and helicopter onboard must meet the vessels stability letter standards however.

USFS Response: It is USFS policy that helicopter landing pads meet a minimum dimensional requirement of 20 x 20 feet. If other Federal Laws or Regulations require a vessel landing pad larger than 20 x 20 feet, those laws or regulations would govern. In any event, a helicopter landing pad may be no smaller than 20 x 20 feet.

It is not the USFS intent impose certificated vessel requirement on uninspected passenger vessels. Vessels must meet Federal requirements applicable to the class of vessel plus any additional requirements of the RFP such as UPV 5-Star Safety Inspections and Letter/Report/Endorsement from a Naval Architect.

The Final RFP has been updated to better clarify.